Many parents have learned the hard way that what sounds like open communication is often the very thing that closes a youngster's ears and month. One common mistake is The Lecture, the long monologue that often starts with “When I was your age….” Eighteen-year-old Kelly calls lectures “long, one-side discussions in which I don't say much.”

    Kids reflexively（条件反射地） shut down in the face of a lecture. Their eyes glaze over(呆滞), and they don't register any incoming information. Listen to 13-year-old Sarah describe her least favorite times with her mom and dad. “First, they scream. Then comes the ‘We're so disappointed' speech. Then the ‘I never did that to my parents' lecture begins. After that, even if they realize how ridiculous they sound, they never take it back.”

    Lines like “When you have children of your own, you'll understand” have been seriously said by parents since time immemorial. But many of our expert parents, like Bobby, a registered nurse and mother of three, feel that by falling back on clichés（陈词滥调） to justify our actions, we weaken our position.

    Since kids are creatures of the here and now, the far-off future has no relevance to them. Therefore, good communicators like Bobby suggest, “Give specific reasons for your actions in present language: ‘I'm not letting you go to the party because I don't think there will be enough adult supervisions（监护）.'”

    Betty, who lives in Missiouri, uses an indirect approach. “I find that warnings are accepted more readily if I discuss a news article on a subject I am concerned about. My husband and I talk about it while our children absorb the information. Then they never think I'm preaching.”

    This really helped when Betty's kids began driving. Instead of constantly repeating “Don't drink; don't speed,” she would talk about articles in the paper and express sympathy for the victims of a car crash. Betty made no special effort to draw her kids into the conversation. She depended on a teen-ager's strong desire to put in his opinions-especially if he thinks he isn't being asked for them.

    Kids undergo a large amount of pressure and stress during their school exams, which can often become quite overwhelming (to much) for them. It may be the first experience of stress, at this level, they have ever experienced and therefore quite frightening. Yes, you may say that it's all a part of growing up and therefore good lessons for them to learn, and to an extent I agree with you. However, it's important to learn how to prepare for life's challenges so that they aren't overwhelming or scary and so that we are able to manage them the best we can.

    Here are some tips you can use during your kids exam time.

    Break their revision plan down into small parts. Doing this will help transform what once seemed like a huge impossible task into a more manageable one.

    Help them arrange properly so that the subjects they like the least (perhaps ones that require more time and effort) are worked on first; once they are out of the way, it will help reduce the worry.

    Plan week on week to make sure they are on track. Ticking items of a list each week will help them to feel good about themselves and their progress.

    Create rewards for all the ticks - a favourite TV programme, a delicious snack, an hour's surfing the Internet, computer games or whatever it was that they enjoy the most. This will encourage them to carry on and make them feel good.

    Think of strategies on how to deal with exams calmly so their anxieties don't get the better of them.

    Talk about times in their lives when they had been successful at something and look at the qualities they used to get them there - determination, persistence, hard work, patience, positivity, dedication - discuss how they can apply these skills to their exams.

    Acknowledge that if they do their best that is good enough.

    Ensure they realize that this period in their lives will pass and that exams are only a temporary time in their lives; nothing can and does last forever.

    Ensure they keep their eye on the prize: enjoying their long summer holiday when the exams are finished; giving them something to look forward to will help to motivate them and provide a positive end in sight.

    A survey has shown that what you do on a plane can be determined by which nationality is listed on your passport.

    According to the results of an international passenger survey, Australians are the biggest drinkers on board with 36 percent choosing to down the hatch, compared to 35 percent of Americans and 33 percent of Brits.

    The Airline Passenger Experience Association(APEX) spoke to around 1,500 people, aged 18 and older, who have traveled by plane at least once during the last three months and were living in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, China, Singapore, Australia and Brazil.

The results found Chinese travelers are most likely to nod off once the seat-belt sign switches off. They are also the first to take out their credit card for some in-flight shopping and the biggest fans of gaming. Americans on the other hand like to use their time in the air more productively—- when not drinking—- choosing to work while flying at 35,000 feet.

Meanwhile, Brits and Germans are the best at making chat with random strangers—-spending 50 percent more time than any other nationality. Comparatively, Brazilians conduct their conversations online via email, messaging apps or social media.

    Despite plane food having a bad reputation, seven out of ten interviewees said they were happy to eat up on the selection of in-flight snacks and meals. In-flight magazines were also popular with four out of five passengers.

    The international flyers did however express their desire for better in-flight entertainment. “The industry has greatly improved the comfort, entertainment and onboard service, and passengers are accepting those improvements” said Russell Lemieux, APEX executive director. “At the same time, passengers are demanding more from their air travel experiences which will drive more improvements touching all aspects of the journey.” he added.

    It happened to me recently. I was telling someone how much I had enjoyed reading Barack Obama's Dreams From My Father and how it had changed my views of our President. A friend I was talking to agree with me that it was, in his words ,“a brilliantly written book” However, he then went on to talk about Mr. Obama in a way which suggested he had no idea of his background at all. I sensed that I was talking to a book liar.

    And it seems that my friend is not the only one. Approximately two thirds of people have lied about reading a book which they haven't. In the World Book Day's “Report on Guilty Secrets”, Dreams From My Father is at number 9. The report lists ten books, and various authors, which people have lied about reading, and as I'm not one to lie too often (I'd hate to be caught out), I will admit here and now that I haven't read the entire top ten. But I'm pleased to say that, unlike 42 percent of people, I have read the book at number one, Gorge Orwell's 1984. I think it's really brilliant.

    The World Book Day report also has some other interesting information in it. It says that many people lie about having read Jane Austin Austen, Charles Dickens, Fyodor Dostoevsky (I haven't read him, but haven't lied about it either) and Herman Melville.

    Asked why they lied, the most common reason was to “impress” someone they are speaking to. This could be tricky if the conversation became more in-depth!

    But when asked which authors they actually enjoy, people named J.K. Rowling, John Grisham, Sophie Kinsella (ah, the big sellers, in other words). Forty-two percent of people asked admitted they turned to the back of the book to read the end before finishing this story (I will come clean: I do this and am astonished that 58 percent said they had never done so.).

    The light from the campfire brightened the darkness, but it could not prevent the damp cold of Dennis's Swamp (沼泽地) creeping into their bones. It was a strange place. Martin and Tom wished that they had not accepted Jack's dare. They liked camping, but not near this swamp.

    "So," Martin asked as they sat watching the hot coals. "How did this place get its name?"

    "Are you sure you want to hear it? It's a scary story," warned Jack.

    "Of course!" cried out Tom. "If there were anything to be scared of, you wouldn't have chosen this place!"

    "Ok, but don't say I didn't warn you," said Jack, and he began this tale.

    "Way back in time, a man called Dennis tried to start a farm here. He built that cottage over there to live in. In those days, the area looked quite different—it was covered with tall trees and the swamp was a crystal-clear river. After three hard years, Dennis had cleared several fields and planted crops. He was so proud of his success that he refused to listen to advice.

    "'You are clearing too much land,' warned one old man. 'The land is a living thing. It will hit back at you if you abuse it. '"

    "'Silly fool,' said Dennis to himself. 'If I clear more land, I can grow more crops. I'll become wealthier. He's just jealous!'"

    "Dennis continued to chop down trees. Small animals that relied on them for food and shelter were destroyed. He was so eager to expand his farm that he did not notice the river flowing slowly towards his door. He did not notice salt seeping to the surface of the land. He did not notice swamp plants choking all the native plants."

    "What happened?" Martin asked. It was growing colder. He trembled, twisting his body closer to the fire.

    "The land hit back—just as the old man warned," Jack shrugged. "Dennis disappeared. Old folks around here believe that swamp plants moved up from the river and dragged him underwater. His body was never found."

    "What a stupid story," laughed Tom. "Plants can't …" Before he had finished speaking, he screamed and fainted (晕倒). The other two boys jumped up with fright, staring at Tom. Suddenly, they burst out laughing. Some green swamp ivy (常春藤) had covered Tom's face. It was a while before Tom could appreciate the joke.

    Thirteen vehicles lined up last March to race across the Mojave Desert, seeking a million in prize money. To win, they had to finish the 142-mile race in less than 10 hours. Teams and watchers knew there might be no winner at all, because these vehicles were missing a key part－drivers.

    DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, organized the race as part of a push to develop robotic vehicles for future battlefields. But the Grand Challenge, as it was called, just proved how difficult it is to get a car to speed across an unfamiliar desert without human guidance. One had its brake lock up in the starting area. Another began by throwing itself onto a wall. Another got tied up by bushes near the road after 1.9 miles.

    One turned upside down. One took off in entirely the wrong direction and had to be disabled by remote control. One went a little more than a mile and rushed into a fence; another managed to go for six miles but stuck on a rock. The "winner," if there was any, reached 7.8 miles before it ran into a long, narrow hole, and the front wheels caught on fire.

    "You get a lot of respect for natural abilities of the living things," says Reinhold Behringer, who helped design two of the car-size vehicles for a company called Sci-Autonics. "Even ants (蚂蚁) can do all these tasks effortlessly. It's very hard for us to put these abilities into our machines."

    The robotic vehicles, though with necessary modern equipment such as advanced computers and GPS guidance, had trouble figuring out fast enough the blocks ahead that a two-year-old human recognizes immediately. Sure, that very young child, who has just only learned to walk, may not think to wipe apple juice off her face, but she already knows that when there's a cookie in the kitchen she has to climb up the table, and that when she gets to the cookie it will taste good. She is more advanced, even months old, than any machine humans have designed.